Summary
The efficiency of genotopic and climatic characteristics in accounting for the interaction between genotypes and environments has been assessed in a three-year trial involving a set of genotypes presenting a range of root morphology characteristics (number and size). Climatic information on rainfall and temperature was recorded during the experiments, together with extra data on the growth and development of the genotypes. Their effects have been tested in factorial regression models.
Climatic covariates were very powerful in accounting for the genotype by year interaction as well as the year main effect alone. For the number of adventitious roots on internode 7, the main effect of year could be described as a linear function of the average temperature and precipitation that occurred during the period of root initiation and growth. For internode 6, no clear conclusion was possible. For the root traits studied, 74 to 98% of the interaction could be explained by one climatic covariate. The regression coefficients can be considered as measures of genotypic stability.
The genotypic covariates describing aerial development performed rather poorly, compared with environmental ones, even though the physiological and functional relationships between root and shoot are well known. Neither genotype main effect nor genotype by year interaction could be described sufficiently by factorial regression. Still, the genotypic covariates performing best clearly differed between root counts and size. Also the best genotypic covariates differed for main effect and interaction.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abou-El-Fittouh, H.A., J.O. Rawlings & P.A. Miller, 1969. Genotype by environment interactions in cotton — Their nature and related environmental variables. Crop Sci. 9: 377–381.
Davidson, R.K., 1969. Effect of root/leaf temperature differentials on root/shot ratios in some pasture grasses and clover. Ann. Bot. 33: 561–569.
Decoux, G. & J.B. Denis, 1991. INTERA: Logiciels pour l'interprétation statistique de l'interaction entre deux facteurs. Technical Report. Laboratoire de Biométrie, INRA-Versailles, France. 175 p.
Denis, J.B., 1980. Analyse de la régression factorielle. Biom. Praxim. 20: 1–34.
Denis, J.B., 1988. Two-way analysis using covariates. Statistics 19: 123–132.
Denis, J.B. & P. Vincourt, 1982. Panorama des méthodes statistiques d'analyse des interactions genotype x milieu. Agronomie 2: 219–230.
Freeman, G.H., 1973. Statistical methods for the analysis of genotype x environment interactions. Heredity 31: 339–354.
Girardin, P., B. Morel-Fourrier, M.O. Jordan & B. Millet, 1987. Développment des racines adventives chez le maïs. Agronomie 7: 353–360.
Hardwick, R.C. & J.T. Wood, 1972. Regression methods for studying genotype x environment interactions. Heredity 28: 209–222.
Haun, J.R., 1982. Early prediction of corn yields from daily weather data and single predetermined seasonal constants. Agricultural Meteorology 27: 191–207.
Hébert, Y., Y. Barrière & J.C. Bertholeau, 1992. Root lodging resistance in forage maize: genetic variability of root system and aerial part. Maydica 37: 173–183.
Hunt, R., 1975. Further observations on root-shoot equilibria in perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.). Maydica 39: 745–755.
Picard, D., M.O. Jordan & R. Trendel, 1985. Rythme d'apparition des racines primaires du maïs (Zea mays L.). I. Etude détaillée pour une variété en un lieu donné. Agronomie 5: 667–676.
Troughton, A., 1955. The application of the allometric formula to the study of the relationship between the roots and shoots of young grass plants. Agricultural Progress 30: 59–65.
Westcott, B., 1986. Some methods of analysing genotype x environment interaction. Heredity 56: 243–253.
Wood, J.T., 1976. The use of environmental variables in the interpretation of genotype x environment interaction. Heredity 37: 1–7.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hébert, Y., Plomion, C. & Harzic, N. Genotype x environment interaction for root traits in maize, as analysed with factorial regression models. Euphytica 81, 85–92 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00022462
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00022462